Factors associated with positive and negative recommendations for cancer and non-cancer drugs for rare diseases in Canada
Open Access
- 7 June 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
- Vol. 14 (1) , 127
Abstract
In Canada, reimbursement recommendations on drugs for common and rare diseases are overseen by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) and made through the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) and the Common Drug Review (CDR). While the agency specifies information requirements for the review of drug submissions, how that information is used by each process to formulate final reimbursement recommendations, particularly on drugs for rare diseases (DRDs) in which per patient treatment costs are often high, is unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine which factors contribute to recommendation type for DRDs. Information was extracted from CDR and pCODR recommendations on drugs for diseases with a prevalence < 1 in 2000 from January 2012 to April 2018. Data were tabulated and multiple logistic regression was applied to explore the association between recommendation type and the following factors: condition/review process (cancer vs non-cancer), year, prevalence, clinical effectiveness (improvements in surrogate, clinical and patient reported outcomes), safety, quality of evidence (availability of comparative data, consistency between population in trial and indication, and bias), clinical need, treatment cost, and incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER). Two-way interactions were also explored. A total of 103 recommendations were included. Eleven were resubmissions, all of which received a positive recommendation. Among new submissions (n = 92), DRDs that were safe or offered improvements in clinical or patient reported outcomes were more likely to receive positive reimbursement recommendations. No associations between recommendation type and daily treatment cost, cost-effectiveness, or condition (cancer or non-cancer) were found. Clinical effectiveness, as opposed to economic considerations or whether the drug is indicated for cancer or non-cancer, determine the type of reimbursement recommendation.Keywords
Funding Information
- Canadian Institute of Health Research
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Inter-jurisdictional cooperation on pharmaceutical product listing agreements: views from Canadian provincesBMC Health Services Research, 2013
- Common Drug Review RecommendationsPharmacoEconomics, 2012
- Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: the need for more transparencyOrphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 2011
- Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regressionSource Code for Biology and Medicine, 2008
- The Role of Economic Evidence in Canadian Oncology Reimbursement Decision-Making: To Lambda and BeyondValue in Health, 2008
- Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugsInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2007
- Drugs for exceptionally rare diseases: do they deserve special status for funding?QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Surrogate Endpoints And FDA’s Accelerated Approval ProcessHealth Affairs, 2005
- QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literatureHealth Economics, 2004
- Applied Logistic RegressionTechnometrics, 1992